Film: Trashed: this is the story of garbage….American style Director: Bill Kirkos Release year: 2007
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This film is primarily about the immense waste that is both created and improperly managed by the United States. It addresses the shear mass of waste that we produce and how coupled with the economic profitability of processing it we have created a system that is quite unsustainable. The solid waste industry generates $43 billion annually while processing the 400 million tons of waste that is produced in the United States every year. Each American produces approximately 4.5 lbs a day in contribution to this total. Because of this 10,000 landfills exist in the United States which contribute more methane to the atmosphere than any other process and pose a dangerous hazard to our ground water supplies.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are a number of sustainability problems inherent in our society’s process of dealing with waste. Culture or the behavior of society itself demonstrates a sustainability problem; much of the population loses sight of the fact that just “because we’re a land of plenty doesn’t mean we should be wasting plenty.” There was a mental shift that can be observed in our culture post World War II that effectively broke the guilt brought about in people’s minds when they were wasteful during the times of limited resources associated with the Great Depression and the war. An explosion of commerce occurred simultaneously with increased wealth and advertising helping form the idea of use once and toss or modern American consumerism. With this explosion of commerce it became necessary that landfills be implemented on a much larger scale. In this modern society consumers don’t think about how things are made or what happens to things after they are put out on the curb. For many it even becomes a badge of our affluence that they can throw things away and buy something new.
There are also a number of obvious ecological sustainability problems with the use and development of landfills. Already mentioned was the vast emissions of methane gas which is a significant global warming culprit. Despite this knowledge only about 300 of the 10,000 landfills in the United States practice methane capture (once captured it can be used as fuel instead of polluting the air). Waste leachate (water that has touched refuse) can also contaminate groundwater. The way modern sanitary landfills are designed they will eventually leak. When this occurs the leachate will eventually make it into the aquifers and ground water which is beginning to become depleted in many areas around the world. This leachate in modern history can contain a wide variety of toxic chemicals. Improper electronic waste disposal into landfills in particular can cause high doses of heavy metal concentrations to be found in this leachate. The fact that our designs eventually leak, the lack of methane capture and the land intensity of the process also represent large technological and organizational sustainability problems in the development and implementation of waste disposal methods.
In 2005, Indiana imported 3,000,000 tons of garbage from out of state, 300,000 trucks worth. Between 2004 and 2007 Michigan has allowed over 10 million tons of domestic and international garbage to be buried within its borders. Toronto alone sends over 400 trucks filled with trash to Michigan every day. These stats are indicative of the economical sustainability problems associated with trash disposal. There is a profit motive associated with developing landfills and many areas value this profit far greater than the potential ecological drawbacks. Hundreds of millions of dollars can be made in profit with a large landfill over the course of its lifetime.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The documentary cites the north pacific gyre in the Pacific Ocean and how six times more plastic than marine life exists in this area of the ocean. This is the center of rotation for the water between California and Japan and includes an area twice the size of the United States. I found it very persuasive especially if I had any doubts about human’s ability to truly affect the world through our trash disposal. We aren’t just polluting areas directly associated with landfills themselves, the effects of our waste has tainted millions of miles of ocean.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
Although I found it to be a very interesting topic I was not very convinced by the “Freegan” portion of the documentary. A “Freegan” is one who salvages society’s wasted food while protesting over consumption. These people literally eat and survive from food people throw out and one man that was interviewed was quoted that he hasn’t bought food in over a decade. Although this helps demonstrate how wasteful we are as Americans I would have to imagine this would leave more viewers grossed out than informed. Even if food is still edible when thrown out contamination seems impossible to avoid.
What additional information does the film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc?
After watching this film I felt a need to look into the sanitation movement that caused the concept of the sanitary landfill to be developed. The film said it was initially developed in the mid 1930s by the civil battalion of the army corps of engineers and after World War II further design and implementation was performed under the concept of “let’s make this stuff go away.” I would be interested in determining if there were any other solutions to the problem that were developed or if initial developers were aware of the potential for vast ecological impacts in the future.
What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
I think this film is best suited for adult consumers, especially those unaware of the impact that their waste disposal has. Consumer responsibility needs to be developed in order to bring about industrial changes. One of the sustainability problems cited was people throw stuff away and don’t know or care what happens to it. This film forces them to see the problems associated with the trash they throw away and to think about what they can do to reduce and reuse.
What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
One main point of intervention to counteract the economical sustainability problems would be subsidizing recycling through government. There is currently a greater economic incentive or neutral at best for trash over recycling. It needs to be cheaper to recycle things than to put them into a landfill for both the users and the corporations. Less than 4% of plastic that is used in the United States is recycled. “Urban ore” is a company that collects old things to be either recycled or primarily reused. This is a more radical solution to trash problems. This company is essentially a junk yard for a variety of materials and items and they resell a lot of items as well as properly recycle things like toilets.
Other forms of governmental and international regulation can also be implemented to effectively make it more difficult to put waste into landfills. The zones in which landfills are cited can be limited in order to preserve as much of the natural landscape as possible. For example the zoning policy is much stronger in Ontario than in Michigan because they feel a need to preserve their landscape because tourism is a large business in the area. If Michigan made it equally as difficult then this transport of trash across country borders could be minimized putting pressure on Ontario to reduce its trash in order to preserve its environment instead of sending it to Michigan. Also the N.A.F.T.A. is a point of intervention as it allows this free trade of trash and fails to differentiate between trash and other goods that are traded between countries.
A significant percentage of our waste can also be turned into compost which is a mixture of decaying, once living matter. The composting process could turn our waste into something that is excellent for enriching garden soil. All food, plant debris, a lot of woods and aggregate can all be composted. 330 tons per day of food waste and yard clippings mostly from area restaurants are composted in the greater San Francisco area alone.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental education value?
There could have been more information on how landfills have actually negatively affected human’s health. People may be skeptical about the problems of methane emissions or land use but may react more readily if a case was presented where leachate did leak into a local water supply or if when it does what would actually happen to the local population drinking the contaminated water. Further explanation of the true savings when something is recycled and reused compared to when something is made completely from scratch should also have been explored.
Director: Bill Kirkos
Release year: 2007
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This film is primarily about the immense waste that is both created and improperly managed by the United States. It addresses the shear mass of waste that we produce and how coupled with the economic profitability of processing it we have created a system that is quite unsustainable. The solid waste industry generates $43 billion annually while processing the 400 million tons of waste that is produced in the United States every year. Each American produces approximately 4.5 lbs a day in contribution to this total. Because of this 10,000 landfills exist in the United States which contribute more methane to the atmosphere than any other process and pose a dangerous hazard to our ground water supplies.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are a number of sustainability problems inherent in our society’s process of dealing with waste. Culture or the behavior of society itself demonstrates a sustainability problem; much of the population loses sight of the fact that just “because we’re a land of plenty doesn’t mean we should be wasting plenty.” There was a mental shift that can be observed in our culture post World War II that effectively broke the guilt brought about in people’s minds when they were wasteful during the times of limited resources associated with the Great Depression and the war. An explosion of commerce occurred simultaneously with increased wealth and advertising helping form the idea of use once and toss or modern American consumerism. With this explosion of commerce it became necessary that landfills be implemented on a much larger scale. In this modern society consumers don’t think about how things are made or what happens to things after they are put out on the curb. For many it even becomes a badge of our affluence that they can throw things away and buy something new.
There are also a number of obvious ecological sustainability problems with the use and development of landfills. Already mentioned was the vast emissions of methane gas which is a significant global warming culprit. Despite this knowledge only about 300 of the 10,000 landfills in the United States practice methane capture (once captured it can be used as fuel instead of polluting the air). Waste leachate (water that has touched refuse) can also contaminate groundwater. The way modern sanitary landfills are designed they will eventually leak. When this occurs the leachate will eventually make it into the aquifers and ground water which is beginning to become depleted in many areas around the world. This leachate in modern history can contain a wide variety of toxic chemicals. Improper electronic waste disposal into landfills in particular can cause high doses of heavy metal concentrations to be found in this leachate. The fact that our designs eventually leak, the lack of methane capture and the land intensity of the process also represent large technological and organizational sustainability problems in the development and implementation of waste disposal methods.
In 2005, Indiana imported 3,000,000 tons of garbage from out of state, 300,000 trucks worth. Between 2004 and 2007 Michigan has allowed over 10 million tons of domestic and international garbage to be buried within its borders. Toronto alone sends over 400 trucks filled with trash to Michigan every day. These stats are indicative of the economical sustainability problems associated with trash disposal. There is a profit motive associated with developing landfills and many areas value this profit far greater than the potential ecological drawbacks. Hundreds of millions of dollars can be made in profit with a large landfill over the course of its lifetime.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The documentary cites the north pacific gyre in the Pacific Ocean and how six times more plastic than marine life exists in this area of the ocean. This is the center of rotation for the water between California and Japan and includes an area twice the size of the United States. I found it very persuasive especially if I had any doubts about human’s ability to truly affect the world through our trash disposal. We aren’t just polluting areas directly associated with landfills themselves, the effects of our waste has tainted millions of miles of ocean.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
Although I found it to be a very interesting topic I was not very convinced by the “Freegan” portion of the documentary. A “Freegan” is one who salvages society’s wasted food while protesting over consumption. These people literally eat and survive from food people throw out and one man that was interviewed was quoted that he hasn’t bought food in over a decade. Although this helps demonstrate how wasteful we are as Americans I would have to imagine this would leave more viewers grossed out than informed. Even if food is still edible when thrown out contamination seems impossible to avoid.
What additional information does the film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc?
After watching this film I felt a need to look into the sanitation movement that caused the concept of the sanitary landfill to be developed. The film said it was initially developed in the mid 1930s by the civil battalion of the army corps of engineers and after World War II further design and implementation was performed under the concept of “let’s make this stuff go away.” I would be interested in determining if there were any other solutions to the problem that were developed or if initial developers were aware of the potential for vast ecological impacts in the future.
What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
I think this film is best suited for adult consumers, especially those unaware of the impact that their waste disposal has. Consumer responsibility needs to be developed in order to bring about industrial changes. One of the sustainability problems cited was people throw stuff away and don’t know or care what happens to it. This film forces them to see the problems associated with the trash they throw away and to think about what they can do to reduce and reuse.
What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
One main point of intervention to counteract the economical sustainability problems would be subsidizing recycling through government. There is currently a greater economic incentive or neutral at best for trash over recycling. It needs to be cheaper to recycle things than to put them into a landfill for both the users and the corporations. Less than 4% of plastic that is used in the United States is recycled. “Urban ore” is a company that collects old things to be either recycled or primarily reused. This is a more radical solution to trash problems. This company is essentially a junk yard for a variety of materials and items and they resell a lot of items as well as properly recycle things like toilets.
Other forms of governmental and international regulation can also be implemented to effectively make it more difficult to put waste into landfills. The zones in which landfills are cited can be limited in order to preserve as much of the natural landscape as possible. For example the zoning policy is much stronger in Ontario than in Michigan because they feel a need to preserve their landscape because tourism is a large business in the area. If Michigan made it equally as difficult then this transport of trash across country borders could be minimized putting pressure on Ontario to reduce its trash in order to preserve its environment instead of sending it to Michigan. Also the N.A.F.T.A. is a point of intervention as it allows this free trade of trash and fails to differentiate between trash and other goods that are traded between countries.
A significant percentage of our waste can also be turned into compost which is a mixture of decaying, once living matter. The composting process could turn our waste into something that is excellent for enriching garden soil. All food, plant debris, a lot of woods and aggregate can all be composted. 330 tons per day of food waste and yard clippings mostly from area restaurants are composted in the greater San Francisco area alone.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental education value?
There could have been more information on how landfills have actually negatively affected human’s health. People may be skeptical about the problems of methane emissions or land use but may react more readily if a case was presented where leachate did leak into a local water supply or if when it does what would actually happen to the local population drinking the contaminated water. Further explanation of the true savings when something is recycled and reused compared to when something is made completely from scratch should also have been explored.